Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > >> Boats, Accessories & Tow Vehicles Archive > Archive through November 14, 2005

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    Fb (fbroen)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-30-2005, 4:17 PM Reply   
Test drove and rode the new new X2 today.

-Full ballast
-full sac in the walkway (~400 lbs)
-one fatbuddy (~350 lbs) in each rear locker
-two side sacks (~250 lbs) on the floor
-a 100 pounder on the passenger side to balance the boat.
So about 1700 pounds extra. One person driving.

Jess is 5'5" and rides at 23 mph at 70 feet.

The wake was clean, mellow transition a-la XStar, and reminded us both of a wedged v-ride (VLX).

It seemed smaller than our X2 (X1) which we usually ride with about 1200 and sometimes 1550 on top of stock ballast.

My verdict is that I prefer the X1 wake due to it being peakier.

Room is awesome for such a short boat. The short bow and sundeck really maximize space. I am still not a fan of the bow, but like this one better than the look of the X-Star, but to each their own.





Old    Fb (fbroen)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-30-2005, 4:24 PM Reply   
Close-up:

Old    mendo247            10-30-2005, 4:43 PM Reply   
thats a hot looking boat! wasnt too sure about the new graphics.. but this one looks awesome.. went by the dealer yesterday.. just cant stand that graffiti stuff.. not yet atleast..that fourth pic makes the boat look mean from the front i love it.. nice pics!
Old    billymac            10-30-2005, 5:38 PM Reply   
god i love the looks of that boat...too bad i can't afford one ;) *yet*
Old     (attila916)      Join Date: Oct 2005       10-30-2005, 6:00 PM Reply   
Sweet... what's the true story, 58K loaded, before or after taxes?
Old    John (wildcatx2)      Join Date: Mar 2005       10-30-2005, 6:20 PM Reply   
Hey Fredrik,
When you run that extra weight in your X2/X1, do you use a different prop than the stock 16x18. I want to add 900 to 1000 to my X2 but I don't want to put any excess strain on the motor.
Old    Big Ed (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       10-30-2005, 6:27 PM Reply   
16x18 is not stock prop for an X-2...at least not an 04'X-2.


I ran way more the 1000lbs over stock and you'll be fine with the stock prop.
Old    John (wildcatx2)      Join Date: Mar 2005       10-30-2005, 7:04 PM Reply   
Thanks Ed!
Old    Ken (ghostrider_2)      Join Date: Aug 2004       10-30-2005, 7:23 PM Reply   
For all that ballast that is a small wake, my friends X-2 (02) throws a sick wake thats just looks peeeeuuunneeeyyyyyy!
Old    Ken (ghostrider_2)      Join Date: Aug 2004       10-30-2005, 7:30 PM Reply   
now get past what you call a wake and that is one SA-WW-EETT ARSE Boat!!

I love Carolina Blue
Old    C.I.E. J-Rod (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       10-30-2005, 7:32 PM Reply   
are you guys riding in saltwater? It looks like some foam on the wake, and I was wondering if that might be the reason for it looking so small. Especially for 23 MPH and that kind of weight.

Old    Big Ed (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       10-30-2005, 9:15 PM Reply   
Maybe they got 1700lbs in there but there isn't ANY people in the boat which at that weight every 100lbs counts + it's all water ballast.
Old     (attila916)      Join Date: Oct 2005       10-30-2005, 11:31 PM Reply   
Hey, don't you need two people in the boat to wakeboard? LOL
Old    Mark Riley (madchild1)      Join Date: Mar 2005       10-30-2005, 11:46 PM Reply   
Hey, don't you need two people in the boat to wakeboard? LOL

not in all states...looks like it's not mandatory in maryland.
Old    GD (greatdane)      Join Date: Feb 2001       10-30-2005, 11:57 PM Reply   
1700 lbs on top of stock ballast and that wake looks small! Whats up with that?
Old    Jeff Moore (jeff359)      Join Date: Jun 2005       10-31-2005, 3:40 AM Reply   
I'd think it'd be a little beefier with that weight, but most the time pics aren't an accurate measure.
Old    Andrew Kelley (tws_andrew)      Join Date: May 2004       10-31-2005, 5:45 AM Reply   
Looks like you may want a little less up front. Coming from an old x 2 owner
Old    Fb (fbroen)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-31-2005, 7:09 AM Reply   
Well, technically the two people rule applies in MD...

Yes that is brackish water at that spot, but the comparison with our X2(X1) when riding in that same water still stands....

No, no extra people in the boat but driver ... but again the comparison stands to what we usually ride our X2(X1) with. Either way, seems to me 1700 lbs on top of ballast produces a larger wake in many boats brackish or not. To be honest we were a bit surprised as to the moderate size of the wake given the extra weight. Anyone know what the stock ballast is on that thing? The belly seemed decent size. The rear tanks were pretty quick to fill...

Of course we did not have time to tweak the wake with moving bags around, but comparing to our usual setup, we actually have more weight in the front compared to how we set up that X2, and wake is still peakier in the X1 IMO.

Yeah, I like the new graphics too.

Oh and BTW, the boat was unweighted in the pics, but that is probably obvious.
Old    C.I.E. J-Rod (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       10-31-2005, 7:21 AM Reply   
maybe it needs more weight in the back like the xstar.

I sure the results would be different in fresh water.
Old    Fb (fbroen)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-31-2005, 8:06 AM Reply   
Sure, but I am comparing apples to apples.

We ride fresh a lot of the time too and the difference is minimal in the look and feel of the wake between THAT water and fresh...it is nowhere near ocean salty.

My personal take is that this boat needs to be seriously loaded down to produce a big wake to make it similar to what can be had for less weight in an X1 and even less in a SAN. And it is less verty, but that of course is a matter of preference.

NE way, nice boat with some nice features. Though the clamshell is beyond me...
Old    C.I.E. J-Rod (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       10-31-2005, 8:45 AM Reply   
I'm in agreement.

The brackish I occasionally ride is higher salt content. There is a big difference in the way the boat performs.

Did you see the pictures of the new x2 wake with only stock ballast? I thought the wake actually looked bigger. That's why I started poking at the brackish thing.
Old    Fb (fbroen)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-31-2005, 9:43 AM Reply   
That's fair. Hey at least I didn't get put through the photoshop ringer...

That boat had the RTP engine with stock prop. It handled pretty decent despite all the weight. Less bow rise than the X1 on getting up on the plane, but I suppose it having a wider beam helps there (if not in sinking it).

The nose seemed a lot floatier than the XStar and stayed dry despite purposely bad driving through rollers. But it is also not as raked down as the XStar's, which IMO looks better too.

Wasn't too impressed with the MC "PP," but there are perhaps settings to make it more aggressive at holding speed in turns and not having to turn it on after each shutting of the engine?

And can't say enough how awesome size of cockpit is for that small a boat.
Old    GD (greatdane)      Join Date: Feb 2001       10-31-2005, 10:43 AM Reply   
Are the pictures of the boat before the 1700 lbs was added? The boat looks like it is not loaded down at all.

Geeze, my 2000 VLX puts out a seemingly better wake with just 2000 lbs total ballast.

Hopefully, these pictures are not a fair representation of the X2 wake.
Old    Fb (fbroen)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-31-2005, 10:54 AM Reply   
The wake pics are of weighted boat exactly as described in the initial post.

The boat pics are of a totally unweighted boat (not even ballast).
Old    Big Ed (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       10-31-2005, 11:12 AM Reply   
Pics and wake don't really mix.We may like playing the guess that wake game but in reality there is no way you can tell.


I'm gonna hold my judgement until I get a pull behind one.
Old    Delta Force (wakebordr11)      Join Date: May 2001       10-31-2005, 12:46 PM Reply   
Hopefully that wake is being severly effected by the salt, it seems to be not that much larger than a stock weighted X-1 wake with a few people...

big ed, what diff does it make that its all water ballast?
Old    Big Ed (big_ed_x2)      Join Date: Jul 2004       10-31-2005, 12:52 PM Reply   
Duane,There is a thread about that,I hate repeating myself.
Old    C.I.E..... Evan (guido)      Join Date: Jul 2002       10-31-2005, 1:39 PM Reply   
That's kind of a teaser to post all the info on the additional ballast, then show the pics of the wake un-weighted. Where are the weighted pics.
Old    Darren Yearsley (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       10-31-2005, 1:45 PM Reply   
Evan the boat photos are unweighted but the wake photos are weighted.
Old    C.I.E..... Evan (guido)      Join Date: Jul 2002       10-31-2005, 4:09 PM Reply   
gotcha.... I've got to ride behind it for perspective. The wake looks pretty small. Maybe could've used some more weight in the rear?

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 4:53 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2012 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us